AsburySkinsFan Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 An interesting editorial piece that takes a hard look at just how much Federal money goes to Kentucky, and the disconnect that many have between voting for fiscal conservatives while relying upon liberal spending programs. http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-02-15/paul-begala-its-time-to-defund-kentucky/?cid=hp:beastoriginalsL4 While its small-government crusaders decry Obama’s budget and government spending, the Bluegrass State is thriving on D.C. welfare. Paul Begala says it’s the perfect place for a truly democratic experiment. The great Mark Shields has said that most Americans are theoretical conservatives but operational liberals. I think Shields is right. In fact, we ought to make it a law of political analysis: According to Shields’ Law, the same people who vote for politicians who pledge to slash government spending are appalled when the politicians they elect actually slash government spending. No mother wants to see her child crammed into an overcrowded classroom, where she can experience the joys of head lice. I've never been to a community meeting where anyone said, "I'd like to wait longer for an ambulance," or, "I hope America stops spending all that money on cancer research." Nor did I see anyone at a Tea Party rally burning his Medicare card. When talking about taxes, the late Sen. Russell Long once said, "Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind that tree." And so it is with cutting government spending. Take Kentucky, please. Kentucky has given us Makers Mark bourbon, Churchill Downs, and Kentucky Fried Chicken. Kentucky has also given us Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell, tea party favorite Sen. Rand Paul and House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers. While Rogers was once dubbed the "Prince of Pork" and McConnell has hauled so much pork he's at risk for trichinosis, they are now converts to Sen. Paul's anti-government gospel. McConnell says President Obama's new budget is "unserious" and "irresponsible" because it merely cuts projected deficits by $1.1 trillion. “The people who voted for a new direction in November have a five-word response," McConnell said, "We don’t have the money.” Fair enough. So here's my two-word response: Defund Kentucky. Cut it off the federal dole. Kentucky is a welfare state to begin with. The conservative Tax Foundation says the Bluegrass State received $1.51 back from Washington for every dollar it paid in federal taxes in 2005 (the most recent data I could find on the Tax Foundation's website.) We need to listen to the people of Kentucky. They don't want any more federal spending in their state—and they certainly must be appalled by the notion that they're a bunch of welfare queens, living off the taxes paid by blue states like California (which only gets 81 cents back on the dollar), Connecticut (69 cents), Illinois (75 cents) and New York (79 cents). ...remainder of article at link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I bet that Rand would go along with that completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I say all citizens in blue states should have their Bush tax cuts taken away. This line of reasoning by Begala is just stupid, although I have no doubt someone like Senator Paul would go along with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 This article reminds me of an email I got around the election from a friend of mine who grew up in a small town called Cynthiana, KY: "my 80 year old yellow dog democrat grandma was very upset about the primaries in KY the day before the primaries: "I just don't understand all these poor folks in these counties that have been declared disaster areas by the Government because of the flooding. They've been depending on FEMA to get them shelter, food, water, medical care...but then they'll go to the voting booth and all vote for Rand Paul. The same people who are crying out for 'smaller government' are the ones who have the most to lose if it shrinks." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 This article reminds me of an email I got around the election from a friend of mine who grew up in a small town called Cynthiana, KY:"my 80 year old yellow dog democrat grandma was very upset about the primaries in KY the day before the primaries: "I just don't understand all these poor folks in these counties that have been declared disaster areas by the Government because of the flooding. They've been depending on FEMA to get them shelter, food, water, medical care...but then they'll go to the voting booth and all vote for Rand Paul. The same people who are crying out for 'smaller government' are the ones who have the most to lose if it shrinks." Yup. It's like all those signs saying that government run health care was evil, socialist, and the devil. But don't you dare touch my medicaid! Hypocrites all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Reminds me of the article posted here a few months ago by the guy wandering around a tea party rally listening to everyone sitting on their gov't funded scooters screaming that they want to cut spending. Whether or not is' feasible or realistic to be so drastic as to cut anyone off,, I do think no one is prepared to make the sacrifices it will take to get us back on track. People want the country saved, but they want to have no discomfort. It's not possible. We're spoiled. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 . We're spoiled.~Bang and blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter44 Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/11/fed-tax-sentspent-by-state/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 so whats the point of this thread or begala's comments? Is there an issue with the influence of Rand Paul over the Pork loving neo-cons who were already in office when he got elected? Isnt that a good thing that he might ne converting them to his line of thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 I say all citizens in blue states should have their Bush tax cuts taken away.This line of reasoning by Begala is just stupid, although I have no doubt someone like Senator Paul would go along with it Maybe Begala should have ended with "/sarcasm". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 and blind. Nah, I wouldn't say so. I think there's not a voter in this country who doesn't know we're in a serious financial mess. But I also think the number of people who are prepared to cinch their belts tighter and make sacrifices in order for the whole of us to heal is very small. A lot of people in this country feel entitled, as if they are owed something. I've found that most people are "patriots" in word only, and a whole hell of a LOT of people just plain don't give a damn. and of course, a whole hell of a lot of people just believe what they're told, and won't do anything because it will give credit to the _____ party. Not surprising, considering we're loaded up with douchebags like Jeff Sessions who say one thing one day, and another the next day. Playing politics while we swirl down the toilet is nothing short of disgraceful. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-february-16-2011/i-like-big-cuts Sessions pops in at 2 minutes. Watch how the day Obama's budget came out he says that saving 1 trillion dollars over the next ten years is not acceptable, but just 24 hours earlier, explains that saving 1 trillion dollars over the next ten years is how we get out of this mess. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 so whats the point of this thread or begala's comments? Is there an issue with the influence of Rand Paul over the Pork loving neo-cons who were already in office when he got elected? Isnt that a good thing that he might ne converting them to his line of thinking? Come on SS, read the article, it's not so much about the elected as it is the folks who elect them. They say they want one thing, when in reality they want something completely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Come on SS, read the article, it's not so much about the elected as it is the folks who elect them. They say they want one thing, when in reality they want something completely different. Not sure how you can say that about every individual in the state. I am 100% positive that I could find examples of hypocritical statements in every major issue stance in existence among the people who vote. You dont honestly believe that every person who is in support of small government in KY is a hypocrite and deep down desires more federal programs do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Take Kentucky, please. Kentucky has given us Makers Mark bourbon, Churchill Downs, and Kentucky Fried Chicken. This is where I stopped reading - Kentucky Fried Chicken started in Utah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 This is where I stopped reading - Kentucky Fried Chicken started in Utah. Kentucky Fried Chicken is Mormon? Who knew? (Actually, I didn't know that KFC began in Utah. That's pretty odd) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter44 Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I don't think that Kentucky minds getting more money than they contribute... I guess it's okay to "spread the wealth" as long as most of it goes to red states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 Not sure how you can say that about every individual in the state. I am 100% positive that I could find examples of hypocritical statements in every major issue stance in existence among the people who vote. But, this is not just some side issue, this was the key issue in the last election cycle...smaller government, less Federal spending, cutting socialist/communist/unconstitutional government programs, and the people here in Kentucky voted overwhelmingly for the champion of this mentality, all while those same people absorb billions in Federal tax dollars. I found this article just as interesting. http://www.kentucky.com/2010/05/16/1266910_kentucky-tsks-but-takes-federal.html#more Looking at counties that take in millions of tax dollars per year, and then overwhelmingly voting for the candidate who has vowed to cut those same tax dollars. There is a disconnect, a true cognitive dissonance. You dont honestly believe that every person who is in support of small government in KY is a hypocrite and deep down desires more federal programs do you? Well, that's a nice absolutist statement designed to force me to say that "not every person is a hypocrite" so that means that there is not a huge number of hypocrites who want these Federal dollars all while voting for someone who wants to cut them. Nice try. The truth is, and you know it, that there are a great number of people who call themselves conservatives and who turned out heavily in favor of Rand Paul who would then loudly protest if he actually did what he promised to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 But, this is not just some side issue, this was the key issue in the last election cycle...smaller government, less Federal spending, cutting socialist/communist/unconstitutional government programs, and the people here in Kentucky voted overwhelmingly for the champion of this mentality, all while those same people absorb billions in Federal tax dollars.I found this article just as interesting. http://www.kentucky.com/2010/05/16/1266910_kentucky-tsks-but-takes-federal.html#more Looking at counties that take in millions of tax dollars per year, and then overwhelmingly voting for the candidate who has vowed to cut those same tax dollars. There is a disconnect, a true cognitive dissonance. Well, that's a nice absolutist statement designed to force me to say that "not every person is a hypocrite" so that means that there is not a huge number of hypocrites who want these Federal dollars all while voting for someone who wants to cut them. Nice try. The truth is, and you know it, that there are a great number of people who call themselves conservatives and who turned out heavily in favor of Rand Paul who would then loudly protest if he actually did what he promised to do. no, what I'm getting at is that why would anyone take paul to task over the actions of his predecessors as well as formulate a belief that all KY GOP voters are hypocrites based on a few comments? The truth is, that maybe many people are finally starting to see that federal largess is causing severe economic turmoil and hopefully minds are changing towards reality. I ahvent seen anyone that suported Rand in the contest loudly protesting his proposals yet, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 no, what I'm getting at is that why would anyone take paul to task over the actions of his predecessors as well as formulate a belief that all KY GOP voters are hypocrites based on a few comments? I'm NOT taking Rand to task...I'm taking the electorate to task. The truth is, that maybe many people are finally starting to see that federal largess is causing severe economic turmoil and hopefully minds are changing towards reality. Yep they sure are, and so they voted for their champion, and when he tries to cut the spending they depend on, there will be loud wailing throughout Egypt--such as has ever been or ever will be again. I ahvent seen anyone that suported Rand in the contest loudly protesting his proposals yet, do you? :gus: That's because Rand is a smart enough fella to realize that his proposals to cut unconstitutional spending is completely infeasible, he knows that it'll never happen, and if he does do it he won't get re-elected...why you might ask....because the same people who elected Rand to be their champion of all things fiscally conservative don't really want him to be what they elected him to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Reminds me of this little diddy from a few years ago. Gotta love the blowhard Stuck on Stupid crowd. Joe Republican .by Jeff Parker on Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 12:11am. Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised. All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor. Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune. It's noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to. Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Not sure how you can say that about every individual in the state. I am 100% positive that I could find examples of hypocritical statements in every major issue stance in existence among the people who vote. You dont honestly believe that every person who is in support of small government in KY is a hypocrite and deep down desires more federal programs do you? Of course its a generalization. And of course you can find examples of conflicting statements on every major issue. But do you not think there is a shred of truth to this supposition that there is conflict between the words, and expectations of some who are asking for small government? ---------- Post added February-18th-2011 at 10:25 AM ---------- To be fair, I suspect something similar is probably true in reverse. Those who might support more spending, or expansion of programs, are also (possibly) not raising their hand to pay more taxes. "Someone else will pay for it".. or "Corporate taxes should pay for it" .. "but don't raise my taxes..".. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have." Wow, that sums it all up doesn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I bet that Rand would go along with that completely. Maybe Rand Paul would agree to unilaterally cut federal dollars flowing to his state... But his constituents certainly would not. Not in year 1, much less year 2, 3, 4, 5... Not as their public schools crumble, their roads disapear before there eyes, and their social security and medicare checks stop coming. Frankly though I think the proposal is disrespectful of the state of Kentucky, just because they are on the wrong end of the federal governments largess doesn't discredit their ideas in my mind or as far as the United States Constitution is concerned. The people of Kentucky want to send an irrational knee jerk reflexive small government advocate to Washington, it's their right. It's everybody elses responsibility to listen and work with that representative. Targetting hardships upon his constituency is counter to everything America should stand for. Begala hasn't really thought through his proposal. Bottom line is this country sinks or swims with the common sense of the average citizen. Even if those citizens are today not being helpful in this state or that; the constitution has safeguards sufficient to insulate the nation from short term public opinion swings, What makes this coutry great and has always made this country great is not the genuis of the smartest, or the work product of the elites. It's that when push comes to shove over a sustained period of time, our common people have made truely inspired and thoughtful decisions which have seen us through our darkest moments as a nation. I wouldn't want to hang my hopes for the future of the nation on anything else; even though I think Rand Paul and the tea party are often unsophisticated and on the wrong side of important decisions, They are part of an important conversation which needs to be diverse in opinion for the good of the country... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 This is where I stopped reading - Kentucky Fried Chicken started in Utah. So Kentucky Fried Chicken is neither chicken nor from Kentucky? How'd that name come about? They should have named it Utah Fried Petri-dish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 So Kentucky Fried Chicken is neither chicken nor from Kentucky? How'd that name come about?They should have named it Utah Fried Petri-dish. The colonel was from Indiana. I think he opened his first restaurant in KY (was not a KFC, was just an eatery), and the state gave him that title for some sort of humanitarian work or something, I dunno. But he traveled to Utah before he found a business partner that was interested in selling his chicken out of a restaurant, and the first one opened in Salt Lake City. My dad grew up in Utah in the 40s and 50s and remembers them, they were called something else (I can't remember). Anywho, to come full circle, don't hate on KFC. You can't go wrong with a bucket of original recipe and some mashed potatoes and biscuits on gameday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.